“I know that there are Democratic Party leaders that do not want me saying this. … I make no apologies for it because I understand the history of this country, and I don’t think we should be afraid to say this: Repeal the Second Amendment. Repeal the Second Amendment,” Moore urged.
“You don’t need a gun,” Moore added. “If you’re afraid of somebody breaking in, get a dog.”
If a dog is going to be a deterrent to a violent predator then they have to be large and capable of inflicting serious, life threatening, damage. So, essentially you have the same level of damage as a firearm but instead of under your complete control it is under the control of an animal brain over which you have moderate control.
The way I see this is that if you believe a dog is better than a firearm it means you believe some dog brain has better judgement and is less likely to make a mistake in defending you and yours than you are. Plus there is the lack of availability when you go to work, the store, or the movies, etc.. That is also a “cost” of making that tradeoff.
For this increased reliability and decreased availability you are willing to a pay a lot more. This says to me that the increased reliability must be an order of magnitude or so better than what you have with a firearm 100% under your control.
This makes perfect sense in the case of Moore. But he should not be speaking for others who are not so mentally handicapped that, by his own indirect admission, he believes a dog is ten times smarter than he is.